Talk:Premaloka

India: Karnataka / Cinema Low‑importance

	India portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject India, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of India-related topics. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page.IndiaWikipedia:WikiProject IndiaTemplate:WikiProject IndiaIndia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Karnataka (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema workgroup (assessed as Low-importance).

Film: Indian

	Film portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Film. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see lists of open tasks and regional and topical task forces. To use this banner, please refer to the documentation. To improve this article, please refer to the guidelines.FilmWikipedia:WikiProject FilmTemplate:WikiProject Filmfilm articles
	This article is supported by the Indian cinema task force.

Article needs rewriting and attention from more experienced user[edit]

This article has some serious issues in tone. Puffery and colloquialisms are used pervasively throughout the article. I've pointed out some obvious ones with inline tags. In particular, the second paragraph of the lead section is very poorly written - it it composed mostly of opinion and even uses the first person at one point.

I'd be bold and fix it myself, but I think the problem lies much deeper than that. Not only is the article completely devoid of citations, it is also greatly lacking in material formatted as factual statements rather than opinion. For this reason, I (for the moment) have avoided following the usual rule of outright deleting material that can't be sourced, as that would cut down the article length by at least 75 percent. As a novice editor, I'm wary of doing this. Also, I think a rewrite is in order, which I'm not confident in my ability to do. Therefore I think this article needs the attention of somebody with more experience than me. Paulwe2 (talk) 00:03, 29 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is coming along excellently! I had a quick look and noticed that there are more citations, which is good. I added some section templates to point out where work is still needed. Sorry for tagging and running, but I don't really have the time or knowledge to fix this at the moment. Paulwe2 (talk) 22:25, 3 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]